Disappointing day at the range....

[L_Kilkenny]

Did some shooting today with the new Marbles "Bullseye" rear sight (http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?p ... ber=132532) on the Win 94AE. Tried 3 different loads: 110gr SP's over 15 grs of SR4759, 125gr HP's over 33grs of H4895 and factory Winchester 150's. The 110 loads shot a 5 shot group @ 6.25" (2 3/8" if you throw out a flier 4" low and left). The 125 load shot a 3 shot group at 3.25". The factory 150's shot a 3 shot group @ 2.25". Ya want the real bad news? This was all shot at 50 yards!

I contribute a fair share of this poor shooting to the gun but also some to the new sight (none from me, I'm a rock! LOL). The sun was out and it made the already hard to "visualize" rear sight about impossible to see. While even my feeble mind can grasp the idea that you aren't suppose to focus on the rear sight, you have to at least have a basic idea where the center of the sight is. The aperture in the sight is too large and the shoulder to hard to see in the sun. Might as well of been using no rear sight and point shooting using only the front bead. Not really but close. That being said, the sight is fast for snap shooting at large targets.

Now as stated, only part of the blame should got to the rear sight. I still did a fair job of getting the sights lined up and it still shot like hell. 2" at 50 I can live with, not 3-4-6". I've got a lot of work to go!

If anyone has some loads you've had good luck with that I can try using jacketed bullets give out a shout. I currently stock H4895, H380 and SR4759. The 125gr load above used to shoot 1.25-1.5" groups at 100 yards in an old trapper I had using a Williams receiver sight.

[L_Kilkenny]

Revision: I decided to run out and do some more shooting and find out for sure if my issues were "gun/ammo/shooter" related or "rear sight/shooter" related. I quickly mounted a 2-7x scope that I had previously taken off the gun and hit up my range.

Group #1: 4 shots, Factory 150's = 2 5/8"
Group #2: 3 shots, 125grainers in front of H4895 = 2 1/16"
Group #3: 5 shots 110grainers in front of SR4759 = 1 5/16"

The 125 gr reloads show definite improvement over the bullseye sight. 2 1/16" vs 3.25". But it was only 3 shots. The factory 150's are close to the same either way. Only 4 because it was the last of the box. My 110gr reloads....oh my! What did I do to get this? 1 5/16" vs 2 3/8"? (or 6 1/4 if I count my flier, I usually do but it was real bad). 1 5/16" is definitely in my idea of acceptable. No it's not sub-MOA like my 22-250 but that would be beyond reason to expect.

Much happier now, showing promise. But I'll lose that scope one way or the other!

LK

[gimdandy]

I believe that you would be time and frustration ahead if you would leave the scope attached and get all your load work done and then try different sights. Just a way of taking out variables since you have a gun that you don't already have a load (loads ) worked up and then you're trying out new and different sights

[Griff]

I gotta agree with gimdandy. And, when you go back to the peep, you might try a smaller aperature on that tang sight, especially on very sunny, bright days. Until you get used to shooting thru a peep, it can be hard to "center" the front in the opening, as you're still conciously trying to make SURE it's centered. You haven't "learned" to trust your subconcious, yet. The smaller aperature makes this easier, as you will see the "ghost ring" of the sight in your sight picture. That's why it's sometimes easier for folks to pick up a receiver sight and use it to good advantage over a tang peep. The tang sight is much closer to your eye, and therefore, needs a smaller aperature to be "seen".

[fordwannabe]

When I am doing load work ups I put a 18X scope on everything, do the load developement then put on what ever sights or scope is going on it. I know the problem from then on isn't the gun or load(normally the loose nut behind the trigger). Boy do I get some funny looks at the range with a 16 inch long 18x scope on a 336.Tom

[El Chivo]

if only he had used a tang sight! He's talking about the new Marbles barrel mounted fixed sight.

[flatnose]

looks like there is too much light around the aperture, making it difficult to concentrate on the center aperture.

[AJMD429]

When I am doing load work ups I put a 18X scope on everything, do the load developement then put on what ever sights or scope is going on it. I know the problem from then on isn't the gun or load(normally the loose nut behind the trigger). Boy do I get some funny looks at the range with a 16 inch long 18x scope on a 336.Tom

I do the same thing; here's my 1894 css .357 with a 36x scope...
The first three 100-yard shots got me so excited I think I started flinching and the next three strung across (or maybe some lateral barrel-warm-up thing, who knows).



I still haven't decided the role of the Marble's on the little carbine yet; I got three shots in about 1-1/2" at 50 yards with the Marble's (not using the weighted rest as I was with the 36x), but that is about as well as I can shoot ANY iron sight I've tried so far other than maybe the really fine aperture ones (which are not helpful for the 'hunting' and 'plinking' this little gun will do).

These photos do a good job of showing what the sights actually DO look like to my eyes; do they to yours? The one on the left is with it mounted on a Ruger 77/44 with a very small front bead, and the other two are on the Marlin CSS. I didn't raise or alter the front sight, so the view on the far right shows how much of the 'hunting' field of view would be blocked with a normal open sight; that's what made me interested in the Marble's.

[L_Kilkenny]

AJMD, I was wondering how you were liking the new sight. As you guys can see from AJMD's pics the center "bull" is very fine and you can imagine trying to see it in bright sun. It almost disappears. Maybe good fro quick shooting but dang poor for anything even close to precision work. I do like that it blocks very little of the downrange view.

I too usually have a scope mounted for working up loads (the 94AE is my only gun without a scope). As a matter of fact I had a 2-7X on the gun but had since taken the scope off because I didn't like it AND I was having problems with stringing. Thought maybe the scope was the cause. Still think the scope is bad and takes a few shots to get "settled in" after making large adjustments thus causing the stringing. But I put it back on (temporary) and everything seems OK for load development as long as I don't try to adjust.

As you can see, my groups with the scope improved and are bordering on what I would call acceptable for a lever gun. The 110 load might even be called good.

I'm going back to the drawing board and gonna try working up some reduced recoil loads in SR4759 and H4895 at 2000-2100fps using light bullets. Maybe add BlueDot to the list. I'm not getting the range I want with my current 110gr load of 15grs of SR4759 (1700fps?). Bullets I have on hand: 110 carbine SP's, 110gr Speer Varminteer HP's and 125gr Sierra HP's.

LK

[AJMD429]

One other thing many have said is that the Marlins and Pumas both are often over-bored, so if you haven't slugged the gun, I would. I hear lots of folks say their Marlin 1894's do best with heavier bullets and fairly stout loads, as well.

I recently shot a 24" Puma .357 with factory 125 grain and 170 grain bullets though, and the 125 grain were way more accurate. Go figure.

But . . . . . ain't this stuff FUN...